MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337623403 · doi:10.1016/j.medici.2016.04.001

Genetic linkage studies of a North Carolina macular dystrophy family

2016· article· en· W2337623403 on OpenAlexaff
Māreta Audere, Katrīna Rutka, Inna Inaskina, Raitis Pečulis, Svetlana Šepetiene, Sandra Valeiņa, Baiba Lāce

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicina · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneticsSanger sequencingLocus (genetics)BiologyGenetic linkageCandidate geneGeneDNA sequencing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: North Carolina macular dystrophy (NCMD) is a very rare autosomal dominant hereditary disease. Up to date there are three types of NCMD described and consequently named macular dystrophy, retinal: MCDR1, MCDR2 and MCDR3. The aim of this study was to perform linkage and copy number variation analysis for the family affected by NCMD followed by the selected candidate gene sequencing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study concerned a 3-generation, non-consanguineous Latvian family with NCMD. Genome-wide scan, copy number variation and non-parametric linkage analysis was performed. Analysis resolved the locus of interest to the 5p15.33 region. Two of the genes, iroquois homeobox 2 (IRX2) and iroquois homeobox 4 (IRX4), were selected and sanger sequencing was performed. RESULTS: Linkage analysis indicated a region on chromosome 5 for the analyzed family, corresponding to a genetic locus previously described for MCDR3 (5p15-p13). Chromosomal aberrations were not identified in the affected family members. An upstream intron variant (NM_001278634: c.-139G > A (rs6876836)) in IRX4 gene segregated with NCMD phenotype in the analyzed family. CONCLUSIONS: It is unlikely to be the causative mutation of NCMD due to its high minor allele frequency 0.3532. Therefore, the role of IRX2 and IRX4 genes in the pathogenesis of NCMD has not been proved. Considerable variability in visual acuity between individuals of the same age group in all the families examined was noted. No overlap between NCMD grade and family generation was seen in the family described in the present study.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicinaSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207